Summary: Miss Y has made a complaint about the way her complaint regarding parking enforcement in her area was handled by the Council. However, the Ombudsman has not identified any fault in this respect and does not consider this matter has caused Miss Y a significant personal injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Miss Y, is making a complaint about the way the Council has responded to her concerns about parking enforcement in her area. Specifically, Miss Y says:

• a Council officer spoke to her rudely and abruptly when reporting a parking enforcement matter over the telephone.
• the Council’s parking enforcement team blocked her telephone number to prevent her from raising further matters relating to parking contraventions.
• the Council failed to investigate her complaint into the above two matters.

2. Miss Y said that parking on pavements in her area is causing accessibility issues for wheelchair users and pedestrians. Further, she said this is preventing safe social distancing which is necessary in light of the Covid-19 pandemic. Miss Y says that not being able to raise these matters with the Council is a source of distress for her. As a desired outcome, Miss Y wants the Council to investigate and provide a response to all the issues she has raised.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word 'fault' to refer to these. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended).
4. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended).
5. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I have reviewed Miss Y’s complaints to the Council and Ombudsman, including supporting documents. I have also had regard to the responses of the Council and applicable legislation. Both Miss Y and the Council received an opportunity to comment on a draft of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

7. In early September 2020, Miss Y wrote to local Councillors to complain about the obstruction of pavements on several roads in her area. In response, she was directed to the Council’s parking enforcement team.
8. In mid-September 2020, Miss Y notified the Council about several instances of parking violations in her local area. She subsequently registered a complaint to the Council about the parking obstructions. Further, she claimed that a Council officer was rude to her over the telephone and that her number had been blocked.
9. On 25 September 2020, the Council responded advising they had only one call registered from Miss Y which was quality monitored. The Council said the officer responding to her was polite and courteous. Moreover, it said Council officers do not have the ability to block telephone numbers and such action would have to through a formal process for which there is no record. However, Miss Y escalated her complaint as she felt the Council’s investigation was unsatisfactory.
10. In October 2020, the Council issued its final response to Miss Y. It did not uphold her complaint and repeated the comments it made in its earlier response. Still dissatisfied, Miss Y brought her complaint to the Ombudsman.

My findings

11. Importantly, the basis of Miss Y’s complaint to the Ombudsman does not concern the Council’s handling of parking enforcement in her area. Instead, she says her complaint is limited to the manner in which the Council responded to her. That said, it is clear from what happened that the overriding issue in this matter concerns parking enforcement by the Council, since this is what led Miss Y to report issues and subsequently make a complaint.
12. By law, the Ombudsman cannot question the merits of a Council’s decision in the absence of fault. On review of the documents in this case, Miss Y has raised wide ranging issues concerning parking and traffic enforcement in her area. In my view, the Council has logged and acknowledged the issues raised by Miss Y. It has done this by responding to Miss Y on the issues raised and explained what action is being taken. Moreover, I have seen evidence that Council officers have visited Miss Y’s area in response to her raising specific parking violations. I see no evidence of fault in this regard. I therefore cannot question the merits of the Council’s decision on whether to take parking enforcement action in individual cases. The Ombudsman does not therefore have jurisdiction to deal with the substantive overriding matter in this case.
13. I will now turn to the specific points raised by Miss Y about the conduct of a Council employee, the blocking of her telephone number and a failure to investigate these issues. On the face of it, this is a complaint about the complaints process. In my view, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint processes when I am unable to deal with the substantive matter, this being parking enforcement. That said, I have had regard to the responses of the Council and I have not determined any evidence that there was fault in how it handled and responded to Miss Y’s complaint.
14. In addition, I must in each case assess whether the complainant, by reason of fault, has been caused a significant and personal injustice. This means I must assess whether Miss Y has been caused serious loss, harm or distress. In my view, there is insufficient injustice to warrant further investigation and I have not seen any evidence of fault by the Council. On that basis, I do not propose further investigation of the issues.

Back to top

Final decision

15. The Council was not at fault with regards to the way it handled and responded to Miss Y’s complaint. I also do not consider Miss Y has suffered a significant and personal injustice by reason of any fault by the Council. Moreover, I am unable to deal with the substantive matter concerning parking enforcement. This is because I cannot question the merits of the Council’s decision to act against individual parking violations in the absence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman